Wind and Solar vs Coal, Gasoline, Nuclear

General Discussion about electric vehicles.
Hillhater   100 GW

100 GW
Posts: 11165
Joined: Aug 03 2010 10:33pm
Location: Sydney ..(Hilly part !) .. Australia/ Down under !

Re: Wind and Solar vs Coal, Gasoline, Nuclear

Post by Hillhater » Mar 16 2020 5:34am

What “I” mean, (by baseload) .. is that minimum level of demand that a grid supply never falls below in normal operating conditions.
For example, in Australia, that figure is approx 18 GW ,...invariably at about 4am,... whilst the peak demand can be as much as 32+GW.
So , nothing to do with “synchronous inertia” , or storage technology,...they are just the “tools” required for a RE generation strategy to operate . The fundamental is if the current RE technology can ever fully replace a FF based supply system.
Even that Government paper you linked , concludes the following..
Further development in the renewables sector is required before any significant level of substitution of coal-fired power can take place. Research and development into solar thermal, photovoltaic, ocean and geothermal energy indicates very promising prospects for reliable and continuous power from renewables within the next two to four decades........
.....Provided a suitable policy framework is in place, there appears to be no technical or financial impediment to renewables providing about 50 per cent of all Australian electricity demand by 2040. In the longer term, current research and development suggests that a low-carbon electricity sector is attainable with total substitution of coal, with gas filling the role of change agent...
This forum owes its existence to Justin of ebikes.ca

User avatar
jonescg   1.21 GW

1.21 GW
Posts: 3871
Joined: Aug 07 2009 9:22pm
Location: Perth, Western Australia

Re: Wind and Solar vs Coal, Gasoline, Nuclear

Post by jonescg » Mar 16 2020 6:46am

That government paper was from almost 10 years ago. I'd disregards it's conclusions for anything other than historical amusement.

Ianhill   10 MW

10 MW
Posts: 2129
Joined: Sep 25 2015 5:55pm

Re: Wind and Solar vs Coal, Gasoline, Nuclear

Post by Ianhill » Mar 16 2020 10:15am

Boron, gallium, argon and indium.
Scylla is real don't let the company tell you otherwise, I got a tattoo in the small of my arse crack with its blueprint in microfiche to prove so.

Hillhater   100 GW

100 GW
Posts: 11165
Joined: Aug 03 2010 10:33pm
Location: Sydney ..(Hilly part !) .. Australia/ Down under !

Re: Wind and Solar vs Coal, Gasoline, Nuclear

Post by Hillhater » Mar 16 2020 10:20am

jonescg wrote:
Mar 16 2020 6:46am
That government paper was from almost 10 years ago. I'd disregards it's conclusions for anything other than historical amusement.
Ii agree .!.....
...i do not believe we will even have 50% RE by 2050 !
This forum owes its existence to Justin of ebikes.ca

Punx0r   100 GW

100 GW
Posts: 5513
Joined: May 03 2012 8:16am
Location: England

Re: Wind and Solar vs Coal, Gasoline, Nuclear

Post by Punx0r » Mar 16 2020 11:14am

If we're talking electricity rather than energy, by the end of 2019 the UK was at:

40% renewable (20% wind, 6% solar, 12% biomass)
39% fossil fuel (38% gas, 1% coal)
~20% nuclear

10 years ago it was:

80% fossil fuel (40% gas, 40% coal)
~20% nuclear

https://www.theguardian.com/business/20 ... first-time

Total energy is a harder problem, as would eliminating biomass but it 50% renewable electricity by 2040 should be no problem. The technology is getting cheaper, more capable and more reliable all the time.

JackFlorey   10 kW

10 kW
Posts: 831
Joined: Feb 19 2020 7:22pm

Re: Wind and Solar vs Coal, Gasoline, Nuclear

Post by JackFlorey » Mar 16 2020 12:17pm

Hillhater wrote:
Mar 16 2020 12:35am
Its not that easy. 60-80% of the power needed is continuous, reliable, “Base Load”
Here in California (the 'country' with the fifth largest economy in the world) 32% of our power needs are continuous. Our minimum load is 16 gigawatts; max is 50. So we'd need 16GW of base load right now, and that has been dropping with time as energy saving measures reduce nighttime load. That's where nuclear will come in handy.
which even the most advanced RE powered industrialised countries have realised cannot come from Wind, solar , hydro, or any combination of them with batteries or pumps etc..
The Pacific Northwest is currently 2/3 hydro.

75% is quite doable.

Hillhater   100 GW

100 GW
Posts: 11165
Joined: Aug 03 2010 10:33pm
Location: Sydney ..(Hilly part !) .. Australia/ Down under !

Re: Wind and Solar vs Coal, Gasoline, Nuclear

Post by Hillhater » Mar 16 2020 7:55pm

California, and the PNW are not isolated states, but are integrated within the USA National grid and share multiple interstate connectors and generation facilities with neighbouring states.
If Ca was an “island” country , ( like Australia or NZ),.. it would not have enough electrical power to function, since it has to import over 30% of its total power to supply peak demand, and is necessary to help compensate for the problems resulting from the “relatively High” percentage (20% !) of intermittent wind and solar in the state.
Nationally, the USA grid is still over 60% Fossil fueled with wind and solar supplying less than 10% , Hydro at 7%(2018 data)
Its taken 25+ years to reach that 10% W&S,..( and over 100 yrs to achieve 7% hydro !).. so even assuming “some” more hydro can be sourced .. creating another 5 - 6 times as much more wind and solar is a big call (even if some practical solutions to intermittency, storage, grid disruption, etc etc ...can be found !)
Some source of continuous reliable “base load” will be required into the foreseeable future.
This forum owes its existence to Justin of ebikes.ca

Hillhater   100 GW

100 GW
Posts: 11165
Joined: Aug 03 2010 10:33pm
Location: Sydney ..(Hilly part !) .. Australia/ Down under !

Re: Wind and Solar vs Coal, Gasoline, Nuclear

Post by Hillhater » Mar 16 2020 11:20pm

Punx0r wrote:
Mar 16 2020 11:14am
If we're talking electricity rather than energy, by the end of 2019 the UK was at:

40% renewable (20% wind, 6% solar, 12% biomass)
39% fossil fuel (38% gas, 1% coal)
~20% nuclear

10 years ago it was:

80% fossil fuel (40% gas, 40% coal)
~20% nuclear
Looks encouraging.......
..........providing you accept that converting coal plants to burn wood Biomass is “renewable” and carbon neutral ?
But if you consider that there can never be enough trees to generate electricity from,..or that trees are better used for carbon sequestration,...then the picture is little changed in 10 years
IE,.. RE increased from 7% in 2009, to 26% in 2019
BUT.. electricity consumption in the UK has fallen since 2009 by about 50TWh ( 13% ) ,.so %%s do not tell a true story.
In TWh terms , Wind & solar have increased from 20 TWh in 2009 to 70 TWh in 2019
In reality, the biggest factor in the UKs increased % of RE is the reduction of demand which has been catered for by restricting the output of the Gas and Coal plants, and convincing themselves that wood burning is better than gas burning ! ( dispite the fact that generates double the CO2 and less power !)
This forum owes its existence to Justin of ebikes.ca

JackFlorey   10 kW

10 kW
Posts: 831
Joined: Feb 19 2020 7:22pm

Re: Wind and Solar vs Coal, Gasoline, Nuclear

Post by JackFlorey » Mar 16 2020 11:33pm

Hillhater wrote:
Mar 16 2020 7:55pm
California, and the PNW are not isolated states, but are integrated within the USA National grid and share multiple interstate connectors and generation facilities with neighbouring states.
Yep. And hydro, being _very_ dispatchable, helps deal with coal plants on the grid that can't ramp up or down quickly - and can't shut down.
If Ca was an “island” country , ( like Australia or NZ),.. it would not have enough electrical power to function, since it has to import over 30% of its total power to supply peak demand, and is necessary to help compensate for the problems resulting from the “relatively High” percentage (20% !) of intermittent wind and solar in the state.
PNW has mostly hydro which is _very_ dispatchable. It's not a problem.
Nationally, the USA grid is still over 60% Fossil fueled with wind and solar supplying less than 10%
Yep. And here in California, renewables supply more than 50% of our power - and that is growing every year.

And what happens in California is seen everywhere else in the US ten years later - from emissions laws, to popsicles, to computers, to lasers, to blue jeans. So it won't be long. Ten short years ago wind and solar were under a few percent countrywide - now they are at 18% and also growing rapidly.
Its taken 25+ years to reach that 10% W&S
And will take 5 years to hit the next 10%.
Image

Hillhater   100 GW

100 GW
Posts: 11165
Joined: Aug 03 2010 10:33pm
Location: Sydney ..(Hilly part !) .. Australia/ Down under !

Re: Wind and Solar vs Coal, Gasoline, Nuclear

Post by Hillhater » Mar 17 2020 3:05am

JackFlorey wrote:
Mar 16 2020 11:33pm
And what happens in California is seen everywhere else in the US ten years later - ....
So you think the eastern states (Ill, NY, Pen, etc), will be able to replicate those Ca Solar farms ?
...and where is the USA nationally going to be importing 30+% of its electricity from in 10 years time ??
And how will jacking up the power prices to Ca levels, go down with the rest of the country and affect the national economy
This forum owes its existence to Justin of ebikes.ca

Punx0r   100 GW

100 GW
Posts: 5513
Joined: May 03 2012 8:16am
Location: England

Re: Wind and Solar vs Coal, Gasoline, Nuclear

Post by Punx0r » Mar 17 2020 4:21am

Hillhater wrote:
Mar 16 2020 11:20pm
..........providing you accept that converting coal plants to burn wood Biomass is “renewable” and carbon neutral ?
But if you consider that there can never be enough trees to generate electricity from,..or that trees are better used for carbon sequestration,...then the picture is little changed in 10 years
IE,.. RE increased from 7% in 2009, to 26% in 2019
BUT.. electricity consumption in the UK has fallen since 2009 by about 50TWh ( 13% ) ,.so %%s do not tell a true story.
In TWh terms , Wind & solar have increased from 20 TWh in 2009 to 70 TWh in 2019
In reality, the biggest factor in the UKs increased % of RE is the reduction of demand which has been catered for by restricting the output of the Gas and Coal plants, and convincing themselves that wood burning is better than gas burning ! ( dispite the fact that generates double the CO2 and less power !)
Yes, biomass is questionable, but still better than burning coal. Some of the biomass is crop and other food production waste, but a lot is wood pellets imported from the USA from apparently sustainable forests.

Yes, demand has fallen, partly due to efficiency savings, partly due to offshoring of some manufacturing. However, what is unchanged is an increased percentage of demand is being met by renewables. In terms of coping with demand variability and those "dark, windless nights" it is still valid.

We're only talking about 10 years here. What happens in the next 10-30 years will be very interesting.

JackFlorey   10 kW

10 kW
Posts: 831
Joined: Feb 19 2020 7:22pm

Re: Wind and Solar vs Coal, Gasoline, Nuclear

Post by JackFlorey » Mar 17 2020 11:37am

Hillhater wrote:
Mar 17 2020 3:05am
So you think the eastern states (Ill, NY, Pen, etc), will be able to replicate those Ca Solar farms ?
They will probably replicate Texas wind farms and California solar farms. But their primary source of power is nuclear right now, and it should stay that way as renewables increase.
...and where is the USA nationally going to be importing 30+% of its electricity from in 10 years time ??
Same places it does now.
And how will jacking up the power prices to Ca levels, go down with the rest of the country and affect the national economy
People will use less electricity at peak times and end up paying about the same.

Hillhater   100 GW

100 GW
Posts: 11165
Joined: Aug 03 2010 10:33pm
Location: Sydney ..(Hilly part !) .. Australia/ Down under !

Re: Wind and Solar vs Coal, Gasoline, Nuclear

Post by Hillhater » Mar 17 2020 5:35pm

I suspect you misunderstand how much wind and solar is actually installed in the USA.
Whilst the mix varies from state to state, the “primary source of power” for electricity generation across the USA is still Gas and Coal .NY is 50% gas and i have not heard of any new Nuclear generators being proposed ?
... and (Texas is 75% FFuels !)
...and where is the USA nationally going to be importing 30+% of its electricity from in 10 years time ??
....Same places it does now.
Where exactly is that ??
People will use less electricity at peak times and end up paying about the same.
Nice idea....now all you have to do is make 330m people rearrange their life styles to compensate for a ineffective power system.
This forum owes its existence to Justin of ebikes.ca

JackFlorey   10 kW

10 kW
Posts: 831
Joined: Feb 19 2020 7:22pm

Re: Wind and Solar vs Coal, Gasoline, Nuclear

Post by JackFlorey » Mar 17 2020 5:40pm

Hillhater wrote:
Mar 17 2020 5:35pm
Where exactly is that ??
Mexico. Canada. Places like that. We will do the same thing we do now - which works just fine.
Nice idea....now all you have to do is make 330m people rearrange their life styles to compensate for a ineffective power system.
Setting a timer to charge your EV at night is "rearranging your lifestyle?" Buying LED lights is "rearranging your lifestyle?" You must have an odd lifestyle.

sendler2112   100 kW

100 kW
Posts: 1406
Joined: Dec 07 2012 6:14am
Location: Syracuse, NY USA

Re: Wind and Solar vs Coal, Gasoline, Nuclear

Post by sendler2112 » Mar 17 2020 6:30pm

JackFlorey wrote:
Mar 17 2020 11:37am
But their primary source of power is
Keep in mind that whenever you say "power" or energy (or read about it in the media), what you should really mean to say is electricity. Which is usually only around 20% of total energy.
.
Image
.

JackFlorey   10 kW

10 kW
Posts: 831
Joined: Feb 19 2020 7:22pm

Re: Wind and Solar vs Coal, Gasoline, Nuclear

Post by JackFlorey » Mar 17 2020 6:53pm

sendler2112 wrote:
Mar 17 2020 6:30pm
Keep in mind that whenever you say "power" or energy (or read about it in the media), what you should really mean to say is electricity. Which is usually only around 20% of total energy.
Yep. And almost all of the petroleum wedge is transportation (Hawaii is perhaps the one exception.) And that's changing slowly - but the second derivative of transportation electrification is positive.

sendler2112   100 kW

100 kW
Posts: 1406
Joined: Dec 07 2012 6:14am
Location: Syracuse, NY USA

Re: Wind and Solar vs Coal, Gasoline, Nuclear

Post by sendler2112 » Mar 17 2020 9:06pm

New off the cuff interview with Nate Hagens. On maintaining social cohesion during deflation. Learning a lesson in that we can slash Carbon emissions and nonrenewable resource depletion, not by trying to build our way out of it with solar panels, but by reducing consumption. And after basic needs are met, the best things in life are free. Dependence on world supply chains lacks resiliency. We see that eventually the entire concept of interest bearing debt and finance based on exponential growth will become obsolete. Energy will need to be bailed out and nationalized. This is just the first of many approaching speed bumps. We need to build airbags and seat belts to take care of everyone. We are all in this together. And this is just the beginning. Let's make it a wake up call.
.
https://youtu.be/Tt5dsD1z1R4
.

Hillhater   100 GW

100 GW
Posts: 11165
Joined: Aug 03 2010 10:33pm
Location: Sydney ..(Hilly part !) .. Australia/ Down under !

Re: Wind and Solar vs Coal, Gasoline, Nuclear

Post by Hillhater » Mar 17 2020 10:20pm

JackFlorey wrote:
Mar 17 2020 5:40pm
Hillhater wrote:
Mar 17 2020 5:35pm
Where exactly is that ??
Mexico. Canada. Places like that. We will do the same thing we do now - which works just fine.
IF.. the Ca situation is replicated Nationwide, and 30% of electricity is required to be imported, that represents approx 1200 TWh annually, equivalent to approx 135 GW continuous supply...!
,,,Roughly the output of 100 nuclear plants,..or several hundred major new Hydro facilities !..
Do you think Mexico, Canada or anywhere else could afford that kind of investment just to help the US ?
...oh yea, ..and all those HVDC cross border interconnectors to feed the power into the US
JackFlorey wrote:
Mar 17 2020 5:40pm
Nice idea....now all you have to do is make 330m people rearrange their life styles to compensate for a ineffective power system.
..Setting a timer to charge your EV at night is "rearranging your lifestyle?" Buying LED lights is "rearranging your lifestyle?" You must have an odd lifestyle.
You dont suspect that most folk may have already wised up to that kind of cost saving ? :roll:
You are aware that one of the biggest uses of electricity is A/C , heating, and cooking ?
This forum owes its existence to Justin of ebikes.ca

JackFlorey   10 kW

10 kW
Posts: 831
Joined: Feb 19 2020 7:22pm

Re: Wind and Solar vs Coal, Gasoline, Nuclear

Post by JackFlorey » Mar 17 2020 11:33pm

Hillhater wrote:
Mar 17 2020 10:20pm
IF.. the Ca situation is replicated Nationwide
Right now the US imports a small fraction of its total. That will continue. California will get energy from Nevada when it's windy and cloudy. Northern Cal will get power from Southern Cal when it's sunny one place and cloudy the other. Storage for peaks, DR for control of peaks, nuclear for base load. Not really rocket science.
,,,Roughly the output of 100 nuclear plants,..or several hundred major new Hydro facilities !..
Do you think Mexico, Canada or anywhere else could afford that kind of investment just to help the US ?
They do right now. No reason to change.
You dont suspect that most folk may have already wised up to that kind of cost saving ? :roll:
I know that they have not.
You are aware that one of the biggest uses of electricity is A/C , heating, and cooking ?
Yep. You are aware it's possible to cool down a house BEFORE 5pm?

Ianhill   10 MW

10 MW
Posts: 2129
Joined: Sep 25 2015 5:55pm

Re: Wind and Solar vs Coal, Gasoline, Nuclear

Post by Ianhill » Mar 18 2020 1:07pm

This thread sounds so privileged it's beyond, adjust yourself for the wealth of most and you see the energy consumption is very little, energy is not distributed evenly just like wealth.

Corruption is getting worse the aviation industry is using methods to create fuel from waste and putting a green spin on kerosine while all they are doing is extending their reserves and have the cheek to ask people to donate a pound to offset their own carbon emissions while tankering fuel around adding to the co2 problem.

You can't beat big money it's too established there's too many dirty minds behind it so talk of a utopia but realize this is more of a hell on earth than you fake views of a possible perfectly balanced system in the future of clean energy look around but the place is a shambles all in effort to maximize profit margins.

We are like the covid 19 humans are a pandemic look at the curve expect a flat line when we kill all resources because we are greedy enough to do it no doubt.

Hillhater   100 GW

100 GW
Posts: 11165
Joined: Aug 03 2010 10:33pm
Location: Sydney ..(Hilly part !) .. Australia/ Down under !

Re: Wind and Solar vs Coal, Gasoline, Nuclear

Post by Hillhater » Mar 18 2020 9:14pm

Hmm ?....sound like you have been in “self isolation” a little too close to the bar Ian ? :thumb:
This forum owes its existence to Justin of ebikes.ca

Hillhater   100 GW

100 GW
Posts: 11165
Joined: Aug 03 2010 10:33pm
Location: Sydney ..(Hilly part !) .. Australia/ Down under !

Re: Wind and Solar vs Coal, Gasoline, Nuclear

Post by Hillhater » Mar 18 2020 10:58pm

JackFlorey wrote:
Mar 17 2020 11:33pm
Hillhater wrote:
Mar 17 2020 10:20pm
IF.. the Ca situation is replicated Nationwide
Right now the US imports a small fraction of its total. That will continue. California will get energy from Nevada when it's windy and cloudy. Northern Cal will get power from Southern Cal when it's sunny one place and cloudy the other. Storage for peaks, DR for control of peaks, nuclear for base load. Not really rocket science.
Thats just the current situation.
But you are proposing that the same “import strategy” would extend Nationwide,...which would require 135GW from other ,non USA sources.
,,,Roughly the output of 100 nuclear plants,..or several hundred major new Hydro facilities !..
Do you think Mexico, Canada or anywhere else could afford that kind of investment just to help the US ?
They do right now. No reason to change.
NO ! They do not . And will never be able to, not at that scale
The USA will need to be mostly independent for power generation, IE, a different “model” to that currently supporting Ca.
You dont suspect that most folk may have already wised up to that kind of cost saving ? :roll:
I know that they have not.
[/quote]
I suspect you underestimate your countrymen , and over estimate your knowledge!
You are aware that one of the biggest uses of electricity is A/C , heating, and cooking ?
Yep. You are aware it's possible to cool down a house BEFORE 5pm?
[/quote]
Sure, but how do you cook your breakfast at midday, cook dinner before you finish work, take your morning shower after you start work, cool or heat the house when you get up in the morning, etc etc.
Then consider how utility services, industry, transport (trains etc) , will deal with higher power prices ??
..answer. ..they pass on the extra costs to consumers.
There is no escaping increases in energy costs.
This forum owes its existence to Justin of ebikes.ca

Punx0r   100 GW

100 GW
Posts: 5513
Joined: May 03 2012 8:16am
Location: England

Re: Wind and Solar vs Coal, Gasoline, Nuclear

Post by Punx0r » Mar 19 2020 3:50am

The way we all waste energy at the moment with 20% efficient cars and badly insulated houses there is plenty of scope for more expensive energy that we just use less of.
Sure, but how do you cook your breakfast at midday, cook dinner before you finish work, take your morning shower after you start work, cool or heat the house when you get up in the morning, etc etc.
I thought the problem was supposed to be energy demand at night when solar doesn't work? All or most of these activities would be powered by the daytime glut of solar.

sendler2112   100 kW

100 kW
Posts: 1406
Joined: Dec 07 2012 6:14am
Location: Syracuse, NY USA

Re: Wind and Solar vs Coal, Gasoline, Nuclear

Post by sendler2112 » Mar 19 2020 5:42am

Solar PV in the North East USA has a capacity factor of 5.5% in the winter. With many days in a row near zero. Solar PV heat is not feasible here. Even with every house and building getting a vertical ground source heat pump at $45,000 for 4 tons. That will also need the compressor replaced every 10 years. But whatever solar we can build out will be better than nothing even if it is more complex and costly. We are now getting our first lesson of many that will continue to follow over the next couple decades in the fragility of complex systems and reliance on global supply chains and food production.
.
Here are logs of the 50kW PV system at the near by intentional community which gets the best care year round.
.
Image
.
Image
.
The best that this system has ever done is 20% in July. The yearly average is not quite 14%. This is typical for other PV systems I have studied in my area.
.
Image
.

Hillhater   100 GW

100 GW
Posts: 11165
Joined: Aug 03 2010 10:33pm
Location: Sydney ..(Hilly part !) .. Australia/ Down under !

Re: Wind and Solar vs Coal, Gasoline, Nuclear

Post by Hillhater » Mar 19 2020 5:52am

Punxor....Yes, but the point is ...if you cook breakfast at midday.....its not “breakfast” !
These things have to be done to suit lifes needs,...not to suit a defective power system.
IE: Breakfast , shower, warm the house, etc, before the solar starts working
Ditto in the evening..
It would take impossibly huge amounts of storage to avoid major lifestyle upheaval.
This forum owes its existence to Justin of ebikes.ca

Post Reply